Title
Author
DOI
Article Type
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Abridged republication of FIGO’s staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum
1 Department of Pathology, Building C, Floor -2, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Sant Quintí, 87-89, 08041 Barcelona, Spain
J. Prat. Abridged republication of FIGO’s staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2015. 36(4);367-369.
[1] Kurman RJ, Carcangiu ML, Herrington CS, Young RH, eds. WHO Classification of Tumours of Female Reproductive Organs. 4th ed. IARC: Lyon 2014.
[2] Prat J. Ovarian carcinomas: five distinct diseases with different ori-gins, genetic alterations, and clinicopathological features. Virchows Arch 2012;460(3):237–49.
[3] Gilks CB, Prat J. Ovarian carcinoma pathology and genetics: recent advances. Hum Pathol 2009;40(9):1213–23.
[4] Piek JM, van Diest PJ, Zweemer RP, Jansen JW, Poort-Keesom RJ, Menko FH, et al. Dysplastic changes in prophylactically removed Fallopian tubes of women predisposed to developing ovarian cancer. J Pathol 2001;195(4):451–6.
[5] Callahan MJ, Crum CP, Medeiros F, Kindelberger DW, Elvin JA, Garber JE, et al. Primary fallopian tube malignancies in BRCApositive women undergoing surgery for ovarian cancer risk reduction. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(25):3985–90.
[6] Kindelberger DW, Lee Y, Miron A, Hirsch MS, Feltmate C, Medeiros F, et al. Intraepithelial carcinoma of the fimbria and pelvic serous carcinoma: Evidence for a causal relationship. Am J Surg Pathol 2007;31(2):161–9.
[7] Heintz AP, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, Quinn MA, Benedet JL, Creasman WT, et al. Carcinoma of the ovary. FIGO 26th Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2006;95 Suppl 1:S161–92.
[8] Onda T, Yoshikawa H, Yasugi T, Mishima M, Nakagawa S, Ya-mada M, et al. Patients with ovarian carcinoma upstaged to stage III after systematic lymphadenctomy have similar survival to Stage I/II patients and superior survival to other Stage III patients. Cancer 1998;83(8):1555–60.
[9] Kanazawa K, Suzuki T, Tokashiki M. The validity and significance of substage IIIC by node involvement in epithelial ovarian cancer: impact of nodal metastasis on patient survival. Gynecol Oncol 1999;73(2):237–41.
[10] Panici PB, Maggioni A, Hacker N, Landoni F, Ackermann S, Cam-pagnutta E, et al. Systematic aortic and pelvic lymphadenectomy versus resection of bulky nodes only in optimally debulked advanced ovarian cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97(8):560–6.
[11] Cliby WA, Aletti GD, Wilson TO, Podratz KC. Is it justified to classify patients to Stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer based on nodal involvement only? Gynecol Oncol 2006;103(3):797–801.
[12] Ferrandina G, Scambia G, Legge F, Petrillo M, Salutari V. Ovarian cancer patients with "node-positive-only" Stage IIIC disease have a more favorable outcome than Stage IIIA/B. Gynecol Oncol 2007;107(1):154–6.
[13] Baek SJ, Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT, et al. Stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer classified solely by lymph node metastasis has a more favorable prognosis than other types of stage IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer. J Gynecol Oncol 2008;19(4):223–8.
[14] Bakkar R, Gershenson D, Fox P, Vu K, Zenali M, Silva E. Stage IIIC ovarian/peritoneal serous carcinoma: a heterogeneous group of patients with different prognoses. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2014;33(3):302−8.
Web of Science (WOS) (On Hold)
Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition
Google Scholar
JournalSeek
Top